Theory: Innovation diffusion theory
Theorists: Everett Rogers, Geoffrey Moore
Biographies:
Everett M. Rogers is Regents' Professor, Department of Communication and
Journalism, University of New Mexico. He has served on the faculty of Ohio State
University, Michigan State University, University of Michigan, Stanford University,
University of Southern California, and the University of New Mexico. Rogers is
particularly known for his book Diffusion of Innovations, published in l995 in its fourth
edition. Rogers has conducted research projects on various aspects of the diffusion of
innovations in Colombia, India, Korea, Indonesia, Thailand, Brazil, Nigeria, and
Tanzania, and in Iowa, Ohio, and Kentucky. He has taught in Germany, France, Mexico,
Ecuador, Singapore, and Colombia. Rogers directs research on technology transfer from
government R&D laboratories in New Mexico and Japan, the role of university-based
research centers in creating and transferring technological innovations, and the role of
research universities in technology transfer. Rogers is a Faculty Associate in the
University of New Mexico's Center for Alcohol, Substance Abuse, and Addictions
(CASAA), where he is involved in research on the effects of programs to prevent drunk
driving in New Mexico, with emphasis on cultural factors in such behavior change.
Rogers is also appointed by courtesy in the UNM Cancer Research Center, where he is
investigating the role of the Internet in delivering nutrition information for cancer
prevention in northern New Mexico and southern Colorado, particularly to Hispanics and
Native American people (Everett Rogers, PhD, n.d.).
Geoffrey Moore is a Managing Director with The Chasm Group, a consulting
practice based in California that provides market development and business strategy
services to many leading high-technology companies. He is also a Venture Partner with
Mohr Davidow Ventures, a California-based venture capital firm specializing in specific
technology markets, including e-commerce, internet, enterprise software, networking and
semiconductors. As a Venture Partner at Mohr Davidow, he provides market strategy
advice to their high-tech portfolio companies. Geoffrey is a frequent speaker and lecturer
at industry conferences and his books are required reading at Stanford, Harvard, MIT and
other leading business schools. Geoffrey's current practice focuses on the concepts of his
recent book Living on the Fault Line, targeted to CEO's and senior executives of Fortune
500 companies facing the impact of the Internet. Geoffrey's first book, Crossing the
Chasm, initially published in 1991, adds compelling new extensions to the classical
model of the Technology Adoption Life Cycle. He introduces his readers to a gap or
"chasm" that innovative companies and their products must cross in order to reach the
lucrative mainstream market. A revised edition was released in July 1999 to update
industries and case-study companies. The sequel, Inside the Tornado, published in 1995,
provides readers with insight into how to capitalize on the potential for hypergrowth
beyond the chasm. This second book sorts out how the market forces behind the
Technology Adoption Life Cycle demand the need for radical shifts in market strategy.
Geoffrey's most recent book, Living on the Fault Line, focuses on a single theme: How
should the management of a public company that rose to prominence prior to the age of
the Internet manage for shareholder value now that the Internet is upon us? Living on the
Fault Line guides executives and managers who are coping with disruptive technology,
destabilizing their core market positions, providing them with new models, metrics, and
organizational practices to meet the challenges of the new economy. Prior to founding
The Chasm Group in 1992, Geoffrey was a principal and partner at Regis McKenna, Inc.,
a leading high-tech marketing strategy and marketing communications company. For the
decade prior, he was a sales and marketing executive at three different software
companies. Geoffrey holds a bachelor's degree from Stanford University and a Ph.D.
from the University of Washington, both in literature, and served as an English professor
at Olivet College (Geoffrey A Moore, 2008).
Description of Theory:
Diffusion is the process by which an innovation is communicated through certain
channels over time among the members of a social system (Rogers, 1995, p. 5) Diffusion
is a kind of social change, defined as the process by which alteration occurs in the
structure and function of a social system. When new ideas are invented, diffused, and are
adopted or rejected, leading to certain consequences, social change occurs (Rogers, 1995,
p. 6). Every truly innovative high tech product starts out as a fad – something with no
known market value or purpose but with “great properties” that generate a lot of
enthusiasm within an “in-crowd.” That’s the early market. Then comes a period during
which the rest of the world watches to see if anything can be made of this (Moore, 2002
p. 6).
Rogers' definition (outlined above) contains four elements that are present in the
diffusion of innovation process. The four main elements are: (1) innovation - an idea,
practices, or objects that is perceived as knew by an individual or other unit of adoption,
(2) communication channels - the means by which messages get from one individual to
another, (3) time - the three time factors are: (a) innovation-decision process (b) relative
time with which an innovation is adopted by an individual or group, (c) innovation's rate
of adoption, (4) social system - a set of interrelated units that are engaged in joint
problem solving to accomplish a common goal(Rogers 1995). In figure 1, a conceptual
model of the diffusion of innovations process is provided.
The original diffusion research was done as early as 1903 by the French
sociologist Gabriel Tarde who plotted the original S-shaped diffusion curve depicted in
figure 2. Tardes' 1903 S-shaped curve is of current importance because "most innovations
have an S-shaped rate of adoption". (Rogers, 1983) The variance lies in the slope of the
"S". Some new innovations diffuse rapidly creating a steep S-curve; other innovations
have a slower rate of adoption, creating a more gradual slope of the S-curve. The rate of
adoption, or diffusion rate has become an important area of research to sociologists, and
more specifically, to advertisers (Diffusion of Innovation Theory, n.d.).
Diffusion research centers on the conditions which increase or decrease the
likelihood that a new idea, product, or practice will be adopted by members of a given
culture. Diffusion of innovation theory predicts that media as well as interpersonal
contacts provide information and influence opinion and judgment. Studying how
innovation occurs, Rogers (1995) argued that it consists of four stages: invention,
diffusion (or communication) through the social system, time and consequences. The
information flows through networks. The nature of networks and the roles opinion
leaders play in them determine the likelihood that the innovation will be adopted.
Innovation diffusion research has attempted to explain the variables that influence how
and why users adopt a new information medium, such as the Internet. Opinion leaders
exert influence on audience behavior via their personal contact, but additional
intermediaries called change agents and gatekeepers are also included in the process of
diffusion. Five adopter categories are: (1) innovators, (2) early adopters, (3) early
majority, (4) late majority, and (5) laggards. These categories follow a standard
deviation-curve, very little innovators adopt the innovation in the beginning (2,5%), early
adopters making up for 13,5% a short time later, the early majority 34%, the late majority
34% and after some time finally the laggards make up for 16% (Diffusion of Innovations
Theory, 2004).
Characteristics Rogers (1995) identified in each category of adopters are as
follows: the Early Adopters: (1) integrated part of the local social system, (2) greatest
degree of opinion leadership in most systems, (3) serve as role model for other members
or society, (4) respected by peers, and (5) successful; the Early Majority: (1) interact
frequently with peers, (2) seldom hold positions of opinion leadership, (3) one-third of
the members of a system, making the early majority the largest category, (4) deliberate
before adopting a new idea; the Late Majority: (1) one-third of the members of a system,
(2) pressure from peers, (3) economic necessity, (4) skeptical, and (5) cautious; the
Laggards: (1) possess no opinion leadership, (2) isolates, (3) point of reference in the
past, (4) suspicious of innovations, (5) innovation-decision process is lengthy, and (6)
resources are limited.
Although additional names and titles for the adopters of an innovation have been used in
other research studies, Everett Rogers labels for the five adopter categories are the
preferred or standard for the industry. Moreover, the specific characteristics that Rogers'
identifies for each adopter category is of significance to advertisers interested in creating
an integrated marketing plan targeting a specific audience.
Rogers differentiates the adoption process from the diffusion process in that the
diffusion process occurs within society, as a group process; whereas, the adoption process
pertains to an individual. Rogers (1995) defines "the adoption process as the mental
process through which an individual passes from first hearing about an innovation to final
adoption". Rogers breaks the adoption process down into five stages. Although, more or
fewer stages may exist, Rogers says that "at the present time there seem to be five main
functions (Rogers, 1995)." The five stages are: (1) awareness, (2) interest, (3) evaluation,
(4) trial, and (5) adoption. In the awareness stage "the individual is exposed to the
innovation but lacks complete information about it". At the interest or information stage
"the individual becomes interested in the new idea and seeks additional information about
it". At the evaluation stage the "individual mentally applies the innovation to his present
and anticipated future situation, and then decides whether or not to try it". During the trial
stage "the individual makes full use of the innovation". At the adoption stage "the
individual decides to continue the full use of the innovation (Rogers, 1995)."
Diffusion of Innovations Theory is at its best as a descriptive tool, less strong in
its explanatory power, and less useful still in predicting outcomes, and providing
guidance as to how to accelerate the rate of adoption. There is doubt about the extent to
which it can give rise to readily refutable hypotheses. Many of its elements may be
specific to the culture in which it was derived (viz. North America in the 1950s and 60s),
and hence less relevant in, for example, East Asian and African countries, and as time
goes on. Nonetheless, it provides one valuable 'hook' on which research and practice can
be hung (Clarke, 1991).
Why is the Adoption Process of any relevance to advertisers? The purpose of
marketing and advertising is to increase sells, which hopefully results in increased profits.
It is through analyzing and understanding the adoption process that social scientists,
marketers and advertisers are able to develop a fully integrated marketing and
communication plan focused at a predetermined stage of the adoption process.
Rogers (1995) defines the innovation-decision process as the "process through which an
individual (or other decision making unit such as a group, society, economy, or country)
passes through the innovation-decision process". There are five stages in the InnovationDecision Process: (1) from first knowledge of innovation, (2) to forming an attitude
toward the innovation, (3) to a decision to adopt or reject, (4) to implementation of the
new idea, (5) to confirmation of this decision. It should be noted that prior conditions
affect the innovation-decision process. Prior conditions such as: (1) previous practice, (2)
felt needs/problems, (3) innovativeness, and (4) norms of the social systems. The first
stage of the innovation-decision process entails seeking one or more of three types of
knowledge about the innovation. Rogers describes these as: (1) awareness knowledge is
information that an innovation exists, (2) how-to-knowledge consists of the information
necessary to use an innovation properly, and (3) principles knowledge consists of
information dealing with the functioning principles underlying how the innovation works.
Rogers states that awareness and knowledge of an innovation can be made most
efficiently through mass media. It will be interesting in twenty years or so, to ascertain if
mass media will still be considered the most efficient means to create product awareness
and knowledge.
It is important to consider the consequences or changes that occur to an individual
or to a social system as a result of the adoption or rejection of an innovation. Rogers
identifies three consequences or changes: (1) Desirable versus undesirable consequences,
(2) Direct versus indirect consequences, and (3) Anticipated versus unanticipated
consequences. For the most part, the world of advertising is concerned with the diffusion
of innovation process in terms of how such research studies can facilitate product
adoption and therefore market segmentation. But it should be mentioned that additional
research exists on the diffusion of innovation theory in other scientific disciplines, such
as economic development and in the technological sector.
In The Innovative Choice: An Economic Analysis of the Dynamics of
Technology, Mario Amendola and Jean-Luc Gafford compare the process of innovation
with the diffusion of innovation as "the extent and the speed at which the economy
proceed to adopt a superior technique." The concern is on how the economy adjusts or
`diffuses' to the new technology. This adjustment or diffusion can be instantaneous or
gradual. Amendola explains a `new', expanded interpretation of the process of innovation
has emerged. Less emphasis is on the actual absorption of a given technology, and more
importance is placed on the actual process through which a new technology is developed
step by step. "The economy, in this context, no longer adjusts passively to the technology
but becomes the instrument for determining the extent, the nature and the articulation
through time of the development of the technology." (Amendola, 1988) Although, we are
most concerned with how the diffusion of innovation theory relates to the field of
advertising, it is meaningful to give a brief description of other existing research that is
based on and integrates the diffusion on innovation process into its' study.
Mark Dodgson and John Bessant (1996) in their book "Effective Innovation
Policy: A New Approach" recognize that `success' in innovation is not simply a matter of
moving a resource from A to B, but "the capability on the part of the recipient to do
something useful with that resource", in other words, to innovate effectively. Dodgson
and Bessant acknowledge that innovation is not an "instantaneous event, but a time-based
process involving several stages". They have identified these stages as: (1) initial
recognition of opportunity or need, (2) search, (3) comparison, (4) selection, (5)
acquisition, (6) implementation, and (7) long-term use (involving learning and
development).
In conclusion, the diffusion of innovation process consists of four main elements:
the innovation, communication through certain channels, over time, and among the
members of a social system. Research concerning the diffusion of innovation process has
increased significantly the past several decades due to its versatility. A universality or
similarity found amongst the various research studies on the diffusion of innovation
process is that the adoption process or the rate of diffusion can be charted on an S-shaped
curve.
Of vast importance to those in the advertising field is the innovation-decision
process. Rogers defines the innovation-decision process as the process through which an
individual passes from first knowledge of an innovation to forming an attitude toward the
innovation, to a decision to adopt or reject, to implementation and use of the new idea,
and to confirmation of this decision. The diffusion of innovation process can be tracked
on a micro level as is the case of an individual who is a targeted member of an audience,
or traced at the macro level when considering economic development or technological
advances. In either instance, during the course of the twentieth century the diffusion of
innovation theory has proven to be versatile, universal, but most important relevant.
Some of the methods used to evaluate the diffusion of innovations are network analysis,
surveys, field experiments and ECCO analysis. ECCO, Episodic Communication
Channels in Organization, analysis is a form of a data collection log-sheet. This method is
specially designed to analyze and map communication networks and measure rates of
flow, distortion of messages, and redundancy. The ECCO is used to monitor the progress
of a specific piece of information through the organization (Diffusion of Innovations
Theory, 2004).
Report prepared by: Ryan Burkett
References:
Amendola, M. & Gaffard, J.L. (1988). The innovative choice. An economic
analysis of the dynamics of technology. Basil Blackwell Limited.UK
Clarke, R. (1991). A primer in diffusion of innovations theory. Retrieved October 12,
2008 from http://www.anu.edu.au/people/Roger.Clarke/SOS/InnDiff.html
Diffusion of innovations theory, (2004). Retrieved 10-12-2008 from
http://www.tcw.utwente.nl/theorieenoverzicht/Theory%20clusters/Communicatio
n%20and%20Information%20Technology/Diffusion_of_Innovations_Theory.doc
/
Diffusion of innovation theory, (n.d.). Retrieved 10-12-2008 from
http://www.ciadvertising.org/studies/student/98_fall/theory/hornor/paper1.html
Dodgson, M. & Besssant, J. (1996). Effective innovation policy: A new approach.
International Thompson Business Press, London.
Everett rogers phd, (n.d.). Retrieved 10-13-08 from
http://cervixdisparities.cancer.gov/application/lecture_capture_delivery/view_pres
enter_biography.aspx?str_pk_presenter=fbe3dc44-373f-432b-8699e1a5d119b841&str_pk_organization=1c05dd33-4bd6-4b60-99344694961ce0fa&str_pk_conference=3270af4a-ed59-43c3-af4c-479c4292d557
Geoffrey A.Moore, (2008). HarperCollins Publishers. NY, New York. Retrieved 10-1308 from
http://www.harpercollins.com/authors/6863/Geoffrey_A_Moore/index.aspx?auth
orID=6863
Moore, G. (1991). Crossing the chasm. Retrieved October 12, 2008 from
http://www.amazon.com/Crossing-Chasm-Marketing-High-TechMainstream/dp/0887307175
Rogers, E. (1962). Diffusion of innovations. Fifth edition. Retrieved October, 12, 2008
from http://www.amazon.com/gp/reader/0029266718/ref=sib_dp_pt#reader-link
Rogers, E. (1983). Diffusion of innovations. Third edition. New York, The free press.
figure 1:
Conceptual Model Diffusion of Innovations
Source: Rogers (1995)
Figure 2:
“S-curve” of Innovation
Retrieved 10-31-2008 from
http://images.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://www.abed.org.br/publique/media/romig4
.jpg&imgrefurl=http://www.abed.org.br/publique/cgi/cgilua.exe/sys/start.htm%3FUserAc
tiveTemplate%3D1por%26infoid%3D834%26sid%3D70&h=291&w=370&sz=8&hl=en
&start=2&usg=__DM1_eCnhY89mKu6kDoli9or38i0=&tbnid=blu90ykReYKCGM:&tb
nh=96&tbnw=122&prev=/images%3Fq%3Dtarde%2Bs%2Bcurve%26gbv%3D2%26hl
%3Den